4 ms·

> Because Matrix basically has one decent server implementation and one decent client, both provided by the same company, and even that client is some godawful

> Because Matrix basically has one decent server implementation and one decent client, both provided by the same company, and even that client is some godawful Element thing This is a fair criticism, but IRC is decades old while Matrix is what, 3-5 years old? Give it time and choice of clients and servers will only improve.

badsectoracula 5y ago
And by "improve" everyone understands "get more complicated and bloated" :-P
- azinman2 5y ago
  Yes, by innovating and giving people the user experiences they want. IRC is a joke once you’re used to Slack, especially in an organization that uses it well.
  - nirvdrum 5y ago
    I appreciate having a streamlined chat application, but understand that others feel differently. IRC applications are much better on resource consumption and snappier in my experience, but aren't all that practical on a mobile device. Naturally, how each of us feels about that experience is subjective. So setting that aside, the part about IRC that I haven't seen handled with Slack is being a one-stop shop. With IRC, I can discover and access multiple communities within a single server at once. The most popular servers can be connected to and browsed with a click in most IRC applications. With Slack, I need to find a project's Slack workspace, request an invitation, then go through the process of adding it to each of my clients. I'd love to see the equivalent of a FreeNode workspace where I can join an OCaml channel and a Ruby channel without going through all of the above and dealing with walled-off communities. Revisiting resource consumption, I've opted out of communities that moved to Slack because once I hit around 10 workspaces, the Slack app slowed to a crawl and guzzled RAM. To be fair, that's gotten a lot better in recent years, but I still find managing several workspaces to just be too much cognitive overhead. I may only be in one channel on each workspace, but I can't easily switch between them. With IRC, doing a "/join ##ocaml" is super fast, barely consumes additional resources, and adds a new tab to my main interface for fast switching between channels.
    - arp242 5y ago
      The big thing I miss in IRC is that I can't just open my IRC client, connect to a channel, type a few messages, close the client again, do other stuff, come back a few hours (or even days) later, and see if there are any replies to it. I know about IRC bouncers and all that, but I don't want to set up a server just for that, and managing them is a pain as well. I know about IRCCloud too, but I don't use chat often enough to justify $5/month (I'm poor, and I just want to chat occasionally). I don't care much for Slack for many reasons, but at least I can actually use it. I find IRC to be functionally unusable because of this. From a quick glance, it looks IRCv3 solves this with the chathistory extension/specification.[1] But AFAIK most (no?) servers implement this (yet) and the specification isn't finished either. https://ircv3.net/specs/extensions/chathistory https://ircv3.net/specs/extensions/chathistory
      - nirvdrum 5y ago
        That's fair. Async communication is not its forte. There are definitely times I wish I could communicate with someone that way. Some channels have a logger and that can be helpful. For the most part, I like the "inbox zero" approach. I can hop on and just start chatting and there's no cultural expectation that I've gone through pages of chat logs from the last time I left.
      - Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
        > I know about IRCCloud too, but I don't use chat often enough to justify $5/month (I'm poor, and I just want to chat occasionally). I'd also add that I've often seen IRCCloud banned from many channels due to extreme amount of spam from their users.
    - JeremyNT 5y ago
      I also abandoned Slack completely due to its horrendous performance and UX. I find comments like the parent above you utterly perplexing. There are Slack gateways that exist for native applications. I currently use a Slack libpurple plugin with Pidgin, and although threading is slightly cumbersome, eliminating Electron and/or a browser has greatly improved my experience overall.
  - null4bl3 5y ago
    IRC is a protocol Slack is a product There is a really big difference
  - brennen 5y ago
    The thing is, I don't want these experiences. Am I allowed to stop having them now? Turns out: Not if I want to keep doing my job. Burn Slack to the ground is my considered stance at this point.
- selfhoster11 5y ago
  Features desired by modern users have a minimum complexity to them. It's just unavoidable. Classic IRC has many drawbacks and missing features: - messages sent to you while logged out are lost - no support for videos, images and GIFs - (usually) not great support for emoji - no support for file attachments - no useful mobile clients unless with support from the server Yes, those can be considered frivolous features, but they are used by people to express themselves (which is, in essence, what a chat protocol is used for), they are expected because IRC's competition has them, and some of them are an objective usability improvement that I'm not willing to go back on.
  - MaxLeiter 5y ago
    fwiw, these are all addressed by IRCCloud or The Lounge (and some others to varying degrees)
  - u801e 5y ago
    A lot of these features are normally handled by other services. So for videos, images, and gifs, these can be represented by a URL that's pasted in the channel that you can view with a web browser. The advantage of doing it this way actually makes it easier to scroll back in the chat history when you're searching for something that was posted.

badsectoracula 5y ago

And by "improve" everyone understands "get more complicated and bloated" :-P

azinman2 5y ago
Yes, by innovating and giving people the user experiences they want. IRC is a joke once you’re used to Slack, especially in an organization that uses it well.
- nirvdrum 5y ago
  I appreciate having a streamlined chat application, but understand that others feel differently. IRC applications are much better on resource consumption and snappier in my experience, but aren't all that practical on a mobile device. Naturally, how each of us feels about that experience is subjective. So setting that aside, the part about IRC that I haven't seen handled with Slack is being a one-stop shop. With IRC, I can discover and access multiple communities within a single server at once. The most popular servers can be connected to and browsed with a click in most IRC applications. With Slack, I need to find a project's Slack workspace, request an invitation, then go through the process of adding it to each of my clients. I'd love to see the equivalent of a FreeNode workspace where I can join an OCaml channel and a Ruby channel without going through all of the above and dealing with walled-off communities. Revisiting resource consumption, I've opted out of communities that moved to Slack because once I hit around 10 workspaces, the Slack app slowed to a crawl and guzzled RAM. To be fair, that's gotten a lot better in recent years, but I still find managing several workspaces to just be too much cognitive overhead. I may only be in one channel on each workspace, but I can't easily switch between them. With IRC, doing a "/join ##ocaml" is super fast, barely consumes additional resources, and adds a new tab to my main interface for fast switching between channels.
  - arp242 5y ago
    The big thing I miss in IRC is that I can't just open my IRC client, connect to a channel, type a few messages, close the client again, do other stuff, come back a few hours (or even days) later, and see if there are any replies to it. I know about IRC bouncers and all that, but I don't want to set up a server just for that, and managing them is a pain as well. I know about IRCCloud too, but I don't use chat often enough to justify $5/month (I'm poor, and I just want to chat occasionally). I don't care much for Slack for many reasons, but at least I can actually use it. I find IRC to be functionally unusable because of this. From a quick glance, it looks IRCv3 solves this with the chathistory extension/specification.[1] But AFAIK most (no?) servers implement this (yet) and the specification isn't finished either. https://ircv3.net/specs/extensions/chathistory https://ircv3.net/specs/extensions/chathistory
    - nirvdrum 5y ago
      That's fair. Async communication is not its forte. There are definitely times I wish I could communicate with someone that way. Some channels have a logger and that can be helpful. For the most part, I like the "inbox zero" approach. I can hop on and just start chatting and there's no cultural expectation that I've gone through pages of chat logs from the last time I left.
    - Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
      > I know about IRCCloud too, but I don't use chat often enough to justify $5/month (I'm poor, and I just want to chat occasionally). I'd also add that I've often seen IRCCloud banned from many channels due to extreme amount of spam from their users.
  - JeremyNT 5y ago
    I also abandoned Slack completely due to its horrendous performance and UX. I find comments like the parent above you utterly perplexing. There are Slack gateways that exist for native applications. I currently use a Slack libpurple plugin with Pidgin, and although threading is slightly cumbersome, eliminating Electron and/or a browser has greatly improved my experience overall.
- null4bl3 5y ago
  IRC is a protocol Slack is a product There is a really big difference
- brennen 5y ago
  The thing is, I don't want these experiences. Am I allowed to stop having them now? Turns out: Not if I want to keep doing my job. Burn Slack to the ground is my considered stance at this point.
selfhoster11 5y ago
Features desired by modern users have a minimum complexity to them. It's just unavoidable. Classic IRC has many drawbacks and missing features: - messages sent to you while logged out are lost - no support for videos, images and GIFs - (usually) not great support for emoji - no support for file attachments - no useful mobile clients unless with support from the server Yes, those can be considered frivolous features, but they are used by people to express themselves (which is, in essence, what a chat protocol is used for), they are expected because IRC's competition has them, and some of them are an objective usability improvement that I'm not willing to go back on.
- MaxLeiter 5y ago
  fwiw, these are all addressed by IRCCloud or The Lounge (and some others to varying degrees)
- u801e 5y ago
  A lot of these features are normally handled by other services. So for videos, images, and gifs, these can be represented by a URL that's pasted in the channel that you can view with a web browser. The advantage of doing it this way actually makes it easier to scroll back in the chat history when you're searching for something that was posted.